2016 CX-5 AWD vs 2015 FWD - MPG

[Irenicus]

My girlfriend has a 2015 2.5L FWD with 150,000kms on it. I have a 2016 2.5L AWD with 90,000kms on it.

I'm consistently stunned at how much better the FWD is on fuel. My average consumption is around 11L/100km and hers is 7.0L/100km (she has never reset her trip ever). We just did a road trip and I couldn't believe that after 300km hers still had over 3/4 of a tank left. I just hit less than 3/4 of a tank and I've driven 180km. I know the AWD is heavier and is rated for 2-4MPG less but I think the difference is significant. I've gone through most of the checklist for improving fuel consumption but I'm curious to ask the lads here what they make of it. I've ran a few tanks in the city at 13-14L/100km which feels considerably bad.

Any tips or suggestions to improve my MPG or is this just a thirsty girl and thats the end of it?

 

[HyFlyer]

So your 2016 AWD is about 21 mpg average and girlfriend 2015 FWD is about 33mpg average.

Have you ever checked for dragging brakes on your 2016 AWD? Your's has (potential) problematic rear brake calipers that stick.

Could be differences in driving style as well. What if you swapped cars for a week?

To me, the 33mpg seems about right for highway mpg but a little high for an average and your 21mpg seems low.

 

[Jmaz]

Could be differences in tires (rolling resistance) and tire pressure. These definitely do make a difference but 21 mpg highway is definitely low. But for city/around town driving then 21 mpg would be plausible.

 

[Kedis82ZE8]

I would have to be towing my 1-2k trailer to be getting 21MPG on the highway. I’m normally upper 20’s these days.

 

[GFrosty]

2016 2.5L AWD with 90,000kms on it ... I've ran a few tanks in the city at 13-14L/100km which feels considerably bad.

There are differences from year to year, model to model. And then there are often clear differences between two given examples of a given model, with tolerances and stacking that can occur with a given vehicle. That said ...

14L (3.7gal) consumption over 100km (62.5mi) is just under 17mpg. But you indicate that that's at least a couple tanks of city-only driving. Compared to the (at least in the U.S.) EPA window sticker of 24mpg city, 29mpg hwy, 26mpg avg.

With my 2016.5 CX-5 GT AWD, the U.S. EPA claims I could expect the same (24/29, 26). If I'm not caring much about how much throttle I use, and if I often briskly take off from traffic stops, particularly if I don't get a good amount of sedate highway mileage into the mix, I've gotten as bad as ~18.5mpg or so (for an entire tank full). Not quite as bad as yours, but close. Generally I'm in the 21mpg range for city-only, if I'm caring about the use of the throttle, not briskly accelerating, not using the "Sport" mode. Sometimes higher, but not often, if city-only. Noticeably below the window sticker EPA claim of 24mpg city.

Yet, this is a car that gets between 29-31mpg on long highway trips, assuming the highway routes aren't too hilly. That's running at speeds in the 65-70mph range. Much higher, and my fuel economy dips.

I would look at your tires, ensuring the pressures are at least what the posted psi suggests, if not a couple psi higher. I tend to run 37psi, occasionally a tad higher. When it gets lower than 35psi, I often notice a couple mpg drop in fuel economy.

I would also take a hard look at use of the throttle, in terms of how quickly you get up to speed, whether you're often changing speeds, whether you're leveraging the car's ability to slow you from speed (instead of zooming along but then using solid braking to slow). My guess is that you can squeeze at least several mpg out of this, if you're more-judicious about use of the throttle, about accelerating when not absolutely needed.

In other discussions, people have mentioned the possibility of dragging brakes. Worth having checked, including the electronic parking brake (EPB) if your vehicle comes with that.

Another thing to confirm is whether you've got the splash shield affixed beneath the car. While I've not yet had the shield off the CX-5 for extended periods, it wouldn't surprise me that all the dangling bits and crevices (for airflow to 'grab') would contribute to added drag and reduction in fuel economy.

 

[Irenicus]

There are differences from year to year, model to model. And then there are often clear differences between two given examples of a given model, with tolerances and stacking that can occur with a given vehicle. That said ...

14L (3.7gal) consumption over 100km (62.5mi) is just under 17mpg. But you indicate that that's at least a couple tanks of city-only driving. Compared to the (at least in the U.S.) EPA window sticker of 24mpg city, 29mpg hwy, 26mpg avg.

With my 2016.5 CX-5 GT AWD, the U.S. EPA claims I could expect the same (24/29, 26). If I'm not caring much about how much throttle I use, and if I often briskly take off from traffic stops, particularly if I don't get a good amount of sedate highway mileage into the mix, I've gotten as bad as ~18.5mpg or so (for an entire tank full). Not quite as bad as yours, but close. Generally I'm in the 21mpg range for city-only, if I'm caring about the use of the throttle, not briskly accelerating, not using the "Sport" mode. Sometimes higher, but not often, if city-only. Noticeably below the window sticker EPA claim of 24mpg city.

Yet, this is a car that gets between 29-31mpg on long highway trips, assuming the highway routes aren't too hilly. That's running at speeds in the 65-70mph range. Much higher, and my fuel economy dips.

I would look at your tires, ensuring the pressures are at least what the posted psi suggests, if not a couple psi higher. I tend to run 37psi, occasionally a tad higher. When it gets lower than 35psi, I often notice a couple mpg drop in fuel economy.

I would also take a hard look at use of the throttle, in terms of how quickly you get up to speed, whether you're often changing speeds, whether you're leveraging the car's ability to slow you from speed (instead of zooming along but then using solid braking to slow). My guess is that you can squeeze at least several mpg out of this, if you're more-judicious about use of the throttle, about accelerating when not absolutely needed.

In other discussions, people have mentioned the possibility of dragging brakes. Worth having checked, including the electronic parking brake (EPB) if your vehicle comes with that.

Another thing to confirm is whether you've got the splash shield affixed beneath the car. While I've not yet had the shield off the CX-5 for extended periods, it wouldn't surprise me that all the dangling bits and crevices (for airflow to 'grab') would contribute to added drag and reduction in fuel economy.

On anything but a solid flat road or a decline I'm consistently burning like 15L/100k or more just to move the vehicle on an incline. I constantly monitor the consumption and it's rarely under 10L/100k. My girlfriend got 300km on a quarter tank, I just hit 300km and I'm below half a tank. I tried filling them up to 37psi but didn't notice a difference. I just follow the manufacturers spec at 34psi now as I see no point in changing it.

Still haven't gotten around to jacking it up and verifying the brake dragging but I'm kind of at the point of just accepting it's a pig on gas.

Any other ideas?

 

[Jmaz]

Have the "fuel trims" (long term and short term fuel trims) been checked. Even an inexpensive OBD scanner can show those when viewing the LIVE DATA mode. Maybe the power control module (the "computer") is calling for excess fuel for some reason.

 

[Moonlighter]

I run my CX5 Akera tyres at 38psi all the time, and I get significantly better economy than you’re reporting. Even with the Mrs doing most of the driving, and she’s almost as good at late braking as Daniel Ricciardo!

Long term average sits around 9.2L/100kms and on highway runs, down around 7.6L/100kms.

Pump them tyres up to 38psi and leave them there for at least a few tankfulls.

 

[Mazdiod2]

I have a 12v inflator set to about that amount, if you trust the readout. About 10% over what they recommend.
"38psi all the time"

 

[Moonlighter]

I have a 12v inflator set to about that amount, if you trust the readout. About 10% over what they recommend.
"38psi all the time"

Get a proper tyre pressure gauge, NEVER rely on the pump gauge which are notoriously inaccurate.

Note that my economy figures are from the 2.5 AWD CX5 Akera.

 

[CruzinCX]

My 2016.5 2.5 gets 9.2L/100 kms.

The best I have ever seen was 6.8-7.0L/100 kms. Mine is also fwd but I have 235/60/18 General Grabber HTS60 tires at 35 PSI. Currently I’m at 9.5L/100 kms and the same in winter with 235/65/17.

For comparison, I have seen some newer Honda civics with reported 9-10L/100 kms on the 2.0 with the CVT.

On a full tank for highway driving I have had about 700 kms, but I have the aforementioned oversized tires and the roof rack. The crossbars will be coming off soon and when my wife and I drive back to Ontario in November, I will see what type of mileage I get without the drag from the crossbars and the higher PSI in my winter tires.

 

[Thangpham]

Mine is CX5 2016 Grand Touring FWD with 152K miles and it's normally 31/36/33 MPG with regular gas 87 as recommended by Mazda in the manual. I sometimes use premium gas 93 which is 20% more expensive but the mileage just increases by about 10% (34/39/37). I think engine oil is also a factor influencing the fuel consumption. I always use High Mileage Advanced Full Synthetic oil.

 

[Mazdiod2]

I'm consistently surprised by how much better the FWD is on fuel. My average sits around 11L/100km, while hers is about 7.0L/100km—and she’s never even reset her trip meter. We just did a 300km road trip, and I couldn’t believe that she still had over three-quarters of a tank left. Meanwhile, I had just dropped below three-quarters after only 180km. I know AWD adds weight and usually burns 2–4 MPG more, but the difference feels much more significant in real-world driving. I’ve gone through most of the usual steps to improve fuel economy, but I’m still seeing city numbers around 13–14L/100km, which feels pretty bad.

There are those that have found their AWD differential or transfer case was underfilled at the factory and they added more fluid when they did a fluid exchange.

 

[N7turbo]

Mine is CX5 2016 Grand Touring FWD with 152K miles and it's normally 31/36/33 MPG with regular gas 87 as recommended by Mazda in the manual. I sometimes use premium gas 93 which is 20% more expensive but the mileage just increases by about 10% (34/39/37). I think engine oil is also a factor influencing the fuel consumption. I always use High Mileage Advanced Full Synthetic oil.

I bet if you got the engine tuned for 93 (or even 91) that number would improve.

 

[N7turbo]

I'm consistently surprised by how much better the FWD is on fuel. My average sits around 11L/100km, while hers is about 7.0L/100km—and she’s never even reset her trip meter. We just did a 300km road trip, and I couldn’t believe that she still had over three-quarters of a tank left. Meanwhile, I had just dropped below three-quarters after only 180km. I know AWD adds weight and usually burns 2–4 MPG more, but the difference feels much more significant in real-world driving. I’ve gone through most of the usual steps to improve fuel economy, but I’m still seeing city numbers around 13–14L/100km, which feels pretty bad.

There is certainly something wrong. There is a 1-2 mpg difference between FWD and AWD pre-2021 and for 2021 and onward there is 0-1mpg difference.

 

[Moonlighter]

Filled up the CX5 AWD Akera 2.5 NA and drove from home to the Gold Coast.

First 15 minutes in suburbia & connection road getting out to the highway, then 50 minutes at 100/110km/hr. Trip ave 6.8L/100kms